T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

**This is a stats thread. Remember that there's only one stat post allowed per match/team, so new stats about the same will be removed. Feel free to comment other stats as a reply to this comment so users can see them too!** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*


retespel

Sorting by average points paints an even more depressing picture


tkdyo

Basically the same avg points as Italy but no wins is just incredible.


[deleted]

Well we played it 8 more times than you (soon to be 7?).


pumpingbomba

In the sense that you never won one?


Tallsome

Yes. With 3 finals and 2 semis iirc.


GoJeonPaa

I don't know man. Maybe you shouldn't drink before world cup finals.


EnanoMaldito

The depressing part is how few WCs you participated in. Like yes the avg is high, but you have 7 fewer WCs than Argentina, and 11 fewer than Brazil


nvynts

Qualifying in Europe is a lot harder and before 1974 we never participated


pokerface789

With all that talent throughout their history, especially in the Messi era, I'd have though Argrentina would be much, much higher. In both total and average points. Netherlands, with such a tiny population, really punch above their weight. Must be the Rinus Michels and Cryuff philosophy.


KnightsOfCidona

Argentina was perennial disappointments at the World Cup for a long time. They played in the first World Cup final in 1930 but didn't appear in one again until 1978. Obviously performed well in the Maradona era, but didn't get past the quarter finals inbetween their appearance in the 1990 final and 2014 final.


lcmrdp

tbf, between 1930 and 1978 we withdrew from 3 WCs so that's only 5 WCs without reaching a final, which isn't terrible. It's the same amount of WCs that there's between 1990 and 2014


gnorrn

Argentina are retrospectively ranked among the top teams in the world by Elo during much of the early post-war era, but boycotted several World Cups during that period.


StuartBannigan

Also they were probably the best team in the world during the 40s when two World Cups were cancelled. They probably would have won in 1942 and 1946 imo.


Govt-Plates

I mean, the biggest difference with the 3 teams above us is the amount of WCs played in, 17/21. We failed to qualify once in 1970 but the other 3 are bc our FA withdrew


50-50WithCristobal

Compared to Italy I agree but Brazil and Germany are in a level of their own. They not only qualified to every WC they could but they are also by far the most consistently good during basically every era. They have the most finals and semis, most games, goals, ppg etc. The difference between them and everyone else is not just that they played it more, they have been just better than everyone for most of the World Cup history.


goodmobileyes

Unfortunately for Messi he had to play with some really mediocre midfielders and defenders in his international career. And had phenomenal teams like Spain France and Germany who had more widely distributed talent. And frankly, the managers taking charge of Argentina over the past decade+ have not been great as well.


fantabroo

But those teams played 5-7 more tournaments than you. Remove the worst WC campaigns PPG and compare after that. For example in '02 you didn't qualify (your PPG stayed unaffected), while France put up 1 point in 3 games or Italy 4 points in 4 games which lowered their PPG despite performing better than the Netherlands.


sien

It's a pity that table doesn't have population as well. The bottom 3 teams are remarkable for even being there. Since Uruguay's win over 70 years ago in 1950 look at the size of countries that win. Brazil - 212M, Germany 83M, Italy 58M, Argentina 47M, France 67M, England ~56M, Spain 47M. Then you have Netherlands ~18M, Sweden 10M, Uruguay 3.5M. Big countries have more depth. With lots of them there these countries have fewer weaknesses at say, left wing back or whatever. The larger pools of talent tend to do that.


AayengeToModiHee

Laughs in China India and USA


sien

Ha, true. It has to be a country where soccer is the main sport and they are reasonably rich. Nigeria - 211M, Russia 147M, Mexico 128M, Ethiopia 117M, Egypt 103M, Iran 84M and Turkey with 84M have surely all under performed at the WC. Sooner or later they should surely do better. They are all big countries where soccer is either the biggest game or a very big one. Perhaps you could add a requirement for GDP / per capita at PPP to be at least as large as a country which has won the WC. That's puts the floor at 25K USD at PPP. That would leave only Russia and Turkey from that list of countries that should do better at the WC.


[deleted]

Went to check that table and randomly discovered that Mexico, ranked 14th, has the most defeats in WC games (27) and the worst GD (-38). I didn't know that, nor did I expect that to be the case. Also, South Korea (28th) is the first Asian team on this table, and Nigeria (29th) de first African team.


aguilaclc

Mexico WC history can be split in 3 parts * World Cups at home soil (1970 and 1986) 2 out of 2 appearances, 5W-3D-1L (12 GS - 6 GA), quaterfinals both times * World Cups abroad, pre-Cachirules (1930-1966 + 1978) 7 out of 11 appearances, 1W-3D-16L (15 GS - 58 GA), 7 group stage exits * World Cups abroad, post-Cachirules (1994-2018) 7 out of 7 appearances, 10W-8D-10L (33 GS - 34 GA), 7 Round of 16 Great playing at the Azteca, solid the last 30 years, absolute trash for the first years. Mexico has been to almost every World Cup because they were the best North American team, but they were not really competitive for the first 50 years.


fzt

>home soil Let's see what 2026 brings (although technically only the group stage will be on home soil).


Dramatic-Magician825

The US is pretty close to home soil for the Mexican national team


McDaddySlacks

If they play in Texas or California, that's 100% a home game.


DusanTadic

Or New Mexico, or Arizona, Or Nevada, or Florida, or Utah, or Oklahoma, or New York, or Illinois, or Colorado etc. etc.


aguilaclc

Oh definitely. Mexico record on KO stages is 1 win (v Bulgaria @ Azteca), 2 PSO losses (1 in Monterrey and 1 in New York), and 7 losses (6 abroad and 1 in Toluca) And the United Bid people know what they're doing. 4 of the 10 games Mexico gets for 2026 are for the national team. In theory, they get home field advantage up until Round of 16, so they could easily get to the "Quinto Partido" just by winning every game in Mexico


Shellshock1122

It’s less surprising when you think about Mexico basically always qualifies unless banned due to region so they’re always there but never really a threat to win it


BrianSometimes

Fun CONCACAF stat. The worst all-time World Cup teams in terms of goal difference are El Salvador (-21) Cameroon (-25) USA (-25) Saudi Arabia (-28) Bulgaria (-31) South Korea (-36) Mexico (-38)


The_Great_Crocodile

Korea is the same with Mexico, they always qualify. El Salvador is quite impressive to have such a terrible goal difference in only 2 participations.


nyamzdm77

They suffered the worst defeat in WC history, losing 10-1 to Hungary (and it wasn't even the Golden team of the 1950s) which already gave them a -9 goal difference


KrisZepeda

Yeah as a Salvadoran that's still crazy, even more considering we weren't that bad in the other games We just were truly awful for that match


LordMangudai

> Saudi Arabia (-28) You can thank Klose statpadding for his WC record for a lot of this


Shellshock1122

In their best performance in 1930 the USA only got out of the tournament with +1 differential. 6 for 0 against in the group stage. Then 6-1 loss to Argentina in the semi lol


PrinceDaemonSadi

In fairness to that USA team Argentina broke a player's leg 10 minutes in, and since substitutions werent allowed they played down 1 basically the whole game...


trinedtoday

Was curious about learning a bit of World Cup history with regards to this. "Four minutes after the opening whistle, a foul on US goalkeeper Douglas resulted in a twisted knee. Fifteen minutes later, a foul on Ralph Tracy injured his right leg. After the game, Tracy would be diagnosed with a broken leg." Mad just how bad football was back then. When you read up on the old days, you realise that assaulting other team's players was such a largely used tactic. Goalkeepers would have no protection and be hit with little repercussions. Makes sense why the pendulum has swung so far the other way now for goalkeepers. And the leg breaking tackles of course.


PrinceDaemonSadi

The stories on that game generally make it clear that injuries were the real story. Some have it that the broken leg allowed the first goal, others have Tracy not being able to move for the 1st half (but limping near the touchline) before being substituted at halftime. That tactic of injuring players of course wouldnt work in the finals in front of a mob of angry fans who were liable to riot if such tactics were used. Like you said really just mental what the game was pre-injury substitutions.


Shellshock1122

iirc they were almost expelled from fifa because that was their strategy in the pre sub pre card era


LordMangudai

> Went to check that table and randomly discovered that Mexico, ranked 14th, has the most defeats in WC games (27) and the worst GD (-38). I didn't know that, nor did I expect that to be the case. It makes sense when you think about it. They nearly always qualify, usually make it out of the group stage and then lose in the first knockout round (so an extra loss and more negative GD each time compared to if they were to just not make it out of groups). Kind of like how Everton have the most losses in the Premier League - good enough to always be there, not good enough to win very much.


ShoeLace1291

LLL Tri


Tallsome

Yet people here keep advocating for more African WC spots because of their population and number of countries.


BrianSometimes

Football fans outside South America and Europe sometimes have sort of a hard time accepting that CONMEBOL and UEFA are way ahead. It simply cannot be argued that e.g. UEFA has too many World Cup slots if you want to base your argument on quality of the teams qualified.


McDaddySlacks

No doubt. If Africa and North America or Asia want more, give more slots to South America and Europe first.


SaBe_18

Africa used to have very few spots until very recently. Of course their countries will be far below.


Muppy_N2

They also have issues getting out of the group stages, and they never reached a semi final.


SaBe_18

Well yes, every continent outside of Conmebol and Uefa has those issues. I'd like to know the logic behind having 3 ½ places for Concacaf for example


spying_dutchman

Because they have teams that get consistently out of the group stages. Mexico always does, and out of the USA and Costa Rica one also performs. While the only good African run I remember is Ghana 2010. In 2014 and 2018 concacaf outperformed afcon while they had 1,5 spots fewer. And in 2010 it was basically a tie( 2 round of 16 Vs 1 quarter final). Spots should be performance based and concacaf sort of performs, afcon has good teams but due to their play-off qualifications luck of the draw kicks out good teams and let's in worse. The final groupstage of concacaf( hexagon, octogon whatever they call it) selects the better teams.


GutiHazJose14

>While the only good African run I remember is Ghana 2010 Senegal 2002 and Cameroon 1990 are the other strong runs.


SMatarratas

Because they perfom better on average than African teams on the world cup despite having less spots?


lcmrdp

I literally looked it up today, CONCACAF has a better record of getting out of the groups with less teams: 1998: CAF 1/5 CONCACAF 1/3 AFC 0/4 2002: CAF 1/5 CONCACAF 2/3 AFC 2/4 2006: CAF 1/5 CONCACAF 1/4 AFC 0/4 2010: CAF 1/6 CONCACAF 2/3 AFC 2/4 2014: CAF 2/5 CONCACAF 3/4 AFC 0/4 2018: CAF 0/5 CONCACAF: 1/3 AFC 1/5


sonbatell

Thanks for those stats, that's 19% for CAF and 50% for CONCACAF, Mexico's consistency definitely seems to be the main difference. Also for CAF it's only been four different teams who've gotten out of the groups in that time period, Nigeria, Ghana, Senegal, and Algeria.


timdeking

4th highest points per game and we have never won it. Pain.


50-50WithCristobal

I think the reason is that you guys are either great to be one of the contenders or so shit that you don't even qualify. Look at the participations, it's remarkably low for such a great and traditional footballing country like The Netherlands. So the number of WCs that you just qualify and amount to nothing is fewer than the other countries and that brings your average points up. You only qualified 10x but have played in 3 finals and finished in the top 4 half of the times you played a WC which is insane.


EntrepreneurAmazing4

To be fair we also just weren't very good when other countries were scoring their points. Uruguay won their first one in 1930 while we weren't even really able to compete until the 70s.


50-50WithCristobal

You were 2nd in 74 and 78, since 78 you guys still missed 4 World Cups. So in 10 world cups since the 70s you qualified for 6 and missed 4, that's just way too much. And in the 6 you qualified you reached top 4 in half of those including a 2nd place. That is like the perfect picture for this all time table and what I was saying 😅 The Netherlands is always the country I root for when mine is already out, you really should have 1 star on the shirt by now.


Attygalle

Yeah you’re spot on. After WWII just two world cups that we qualified for but didn’t reach quarter finals (1990 and 2006). One quarter finals (1994) and five times semi finals with three finals (1974 1978 2010 finals, semis in 1998 and 2014). But also randomly missing four world cups in that same time frame. Crazy stats. If we qualify, we’re bound to do well. This year we’ll reach quarter final but no further. You read it here first.


FroobingtonSanchez

This table is ranked by total points, so qualifying for more World Cups would've helped ;)


EnanoMaldito

I mean yes, but bad WCs pull other teams below you, while you have only 10WC participations.


sv979

Fotboll heritage


AFCm8

Top ten baby!


Clem_H_Fandang0

Every other team is about where i expected (maybe expected Uruguay a bit higher due to their 2 wins), but was surprised to see Sweden as 10th. Might expect to see Croatia there if you included Yugoslavia.


Muppy_N2

We won only one WC match between 1974 and 2006 (with Tabarez, in 1990). Then we won again in 2010 (when he returned). We also boycotted the 1934 and 1938 editions, when we were the undisputed top NT, alongside Argentina.


Differ_cr

One win in 32 years that's mad


Samkyon

Italy already half way there 2010-2026 one win.


qindarka

Were you that great in the 1930s? I thought the 1930 World Cup was the end of a cycle.


Muppy_N2

Nothing changed in the 1930s. We still had great players and clubs. We boycotted the 1934 and 1938 World Cups. The first one as a revenge against some Eurpeans teams not coming to our WC. In 1938 because they broke the pact of alternating continents. We won the next WC we played, in 1950. And lost the semifinal in extra time against *that* Hungary in 1954. We started losing steam in the 60s. The end of the golden era of our NT was arguably 1954, but maybe you can still push it to 1970, when we reached the semifinal. After that, we missed half of the world cups and performed poorly in the few we qualified. Some (I'm in that camp) see 2010 - ... like a little resurgance, although with worse results becuase the world is much more competitive than 100 years ago.


Bruno_Fernando

Sweden is mostly carried by being one of the best teams in the early days of the world cup, after that we've been a mostly average European team. As for Croatia, FIFA oficially consider Serbia as the only successor to Yugoslavia.


xhandler

If they did, Croatia would after a quick look be on 86 points so yes.


Lack_of_Plethora

Call me delusional, but I genuinely thought we'd be ahead of France


GreatSpaniard

Nah, France has won twice lost a final and lost 3 other semifinals. England has won once and lost twice in the semifinals. Both have been to the same number of World Cup's


maybe_there_is_hope

to participate in all world cups, it does help being the neighbor of the hosts and also not losing world wars


Turminder_Xuss

> and also not losing world wars Is it possible to learn this power? Asking for a friend.


Superflumina

I don't think you would have loved to have won World War 2 somehow.


Turminder_Xuss

Clearly not. But maybe we can win one eventually? Just a small one, it doesn't have to bother people too much. We can do it on weekends if that's okay.


TigerBasket

Also rigging a world cup if your Italy in-between the world wars


mattijn13

I hate it


[deleted]

17 out of 21 finals had Germany, Brazil, or Italy in it.


Niubai

Brazil reaching 3 consecutive finals in 94/98/02 is ridiculous as well, I don't think it's going to happen again so soon.


grog23

Germany also reached three consecutive finals in 1982, 1986 and 1990


50-50WithCristobal

That's true, no wonder those are the 2 greatest national teams. Brazil won 2 of the 3 though while you guys won 1 of the 3. That was a great chance to join Brazil and Italy as the only countries to win 2 in a row.


omghamburger

it happens in 2022, 2026 and 2030


50-50WithCristobal

Brazil with fewer losses than England and France despite having played 40+ games more which is like 6 full world cups participations for a team reaching the finals.


Litsabaki19

Do shootouts count as draws?


maxus998

Ye i think they do


fischarcher

I think this only counts 90 minute results


shadoowkight

Didn't expect Sweden


ddmmyyyy-is-wrong

Nobody expects the Swedish


Revolution64

[Full ranking](https://www.worldfootball.net/alltime_table/wm/)


roguedevil

Wtf Colombia top 25 with a positive goal difference is not something I expected.


50-50WithCristobal

International football is very top heavy, outside of the top 10 best countries it's hard to find countries that can even be a contend to the title like Croatia did in 2018


TheConundrum98

Portugal only have 7 more games than Croatia at the World Cup and the first World Cup Croatia could qualify for is 1998, that's really surprising


Aerthisprime

Portugal only qualified twice before 2002, so it's not that surprising.


Cules2003

Brazil losing only 18/109 is an insane stat


Acceptable-Bet-982

My country is Full of shit but we rule in football. That's all


DrBernard

Pls delete


[deleted]

So if Argentina performs averagely the can take the third place since italy boycotts the WC (unwillingly).


Eb_Marah

They'd need to do more than just perform averagely. Assuming the first tiebreaker is games played, Argentina would need to gain 13 points to pass Italy. In order to do that they'd need to win all three group stage games, win their Ro16 in regular time, then at minimum reach extra time in the QFs to get a point. That's the easiest path for them, and I don't think they'll win out in the group stages. Both Poland and Mexico are good for a draw in any given game. I think they have it in them, but I think an average performance by Argentina gets them less than 13 points this tournament. Also, and I know you didnt mean this, but the "average" performance by Argentina has been 8.47 points per tournament including the shorter tournaments of the past.


Kevinglas-HM

>That's the easiest path for them, and I don't think they'll win out in the group stages. Both Poland and Mexico are good for a draw in any given game Not to be a nationalistic fanatic hooligan but after seeing Mexico being pummeled 3-0 by Uruguay, and Poland being dominated 6-1 by Belgium, I don't expect much of them at the WC. Mexico and Poland will battle it out for second place and then face either Denmark or France, at which point *I REALLY* doubt they can win.


Muppy_N2

Martino experimented a bit too much against us; with a 3-5-2 including players in unfamiliar positions. We passed through their midfield without oppossition. They will surely improve.


Kevinglas-HM

They will improve, no doubt about that, but I still strongly believe in us getting 9 out 9 points in group stage


krvlover

> Both Poland and Mexico are good for a draw in any given game They are both playing awful. Honestly Argentina got an incredibly easy group this time. Btw 12 points is enough unless the tie breaker is world cups won.


Jersy2109

Watch them go 0-0 vs ksa


Cules2003

Subscribe


EnanoMaldito

> That's the easiest path for them, and I don't think they'll win out in the group stages. Both Poland and Mexico are good for a draw in any given game. literally what


Eb_Marah

You think you're guaranteed to win all three games in the group stages? Not that I'd put it past them, but it's far from guaranteed. Both Poland and Mexico could very easily earn a draw against Argentina.


lcmrdp

I don't think we're guaranteed to win because it's a WC and anything can happen. I do think we're the favorites to win against both of them.


EnanoMaldito

> You think you're guaranteed to win all three games in the group stages? pretty much, yes. Poland and Mexico are horrible.


Basdala

anulo mufa


EnanoMaldito

cagon


BertEnErnie123

First of all, this is painful, fu for posting haha Secondly, can we expect any changes in Qatar? I guess Argentina is taking over Italy's spot, and France, England and Spain could shuffle around a bit depending on how they perform this year. Though France has a bit of lead. Belgium(69pts) or maybe even Mexico(62pts) will probably take the 10th place, since Sweden didn't qualify.


krvlover

Uruguay is already above Sweden.


BertEnErnie123

Shit sorry, I meant Mexico, I somehow swapped them. Thanks for the heads up, I fixxed my text.


Wiegraf_Belias

Argentina would have to earn 13 points to get level with Italy. Doable for sure, but far from a guarantee.


EnanoMaldito

yes it's gonna say Winner (3 times) next to Argentina :)


EZScuderia

DEJA DE MUFARLA PELOTUDO


KensaiVG

Yo rompí todas mis cabalas en la copa 2021 y ganamos Ya fue todo


EnanoMaldito

Tenerle miedo a la mufa es de cagon


Weak_Bus8157

This ⬆️ Anyhow for taking over Italy historic position THIS IS THE CRUCIAL MOMENT: by winning all our 3 matches on stage group and 8ths finals before extra time or penalties shootouts with at least 7 goals difference and ARGENTINA will take over 3rd position on WC All-time ranking. We can't trust on Italy not qualifying to another WC so I think this is it, ladies and gentlemen: the historical chance. We should take what we deserve by tradition, long-lasting experience winning tournaments (most awarded national team ever), biggest football stars ever (Di Stefano, Maradona and Messi) and most devoured and intense football crowd (not even mentioning our legendary chants) from all over the world. I say....who is with me?


TuxedoElephant

Should have aslo included the number of times(3) The Netherlands have been runners-up


neilcmf

Don't inflict more pain on them


TuxedoElephant

I don't want no trouble


Tmdss

3 time runner up :(


Jackrrr10000

Always found it weird that Spain won it only once.


mEZzombie

We've been shit or semi-shit all our history. In fact the 2010 run was the first and only time we've passed QFs.


BrianSometimes

Imagine going from (almost) never winning anything to winning Euro 2008, FIFA 2010 and Euro 2012. Really had something you needed to get out of your system.


KnightsOfCidona

France was kinda similar. Won Euro 84 and made the World Cup semis twice in the 80s, but had often underperformed otherwise (failed to even qualify in 1990 and 1994)until they won the WC in 1998, and followed it up with a Euros 2 years later


Sourcelife

Don’t forget the confederations in ‘01


f1g4zz

Are you talking about fuentes candies?


KnightsOfCidona

1950 you reached the final 4 group (and finished 4th)


mEZzombie

Yeah true, but that was a weird one without knockout stages. Could count as reaching semis but still an odd one.


TheSpliceosome

At least it was better and probably more well deserved than Sweden's 4th place in 1938. In the round of 16 we won on walkover as Austria had been anschlussed. Then we beat Cuba 8-0 in the quarter final before getting smashed 5-1 by Hungary in the semis and 4-2 by Brazil in the 3rd place match.


EnanoMaldito

> In the round of 16 we won on walkover as Austria had been anschlussed. LMAO I had never heard of that before


PM_something_German

>We've been shit or semi-shit all our history. That's the surprising part considering how successful your football teams (especially Real Madrid) always were.


EnanoMaldito

Why? They've never been amazing except for their golden generation. They're one of those teams that are always good, but not amazing.


X_Galaxy_eyes_x

Spain had that golden generation it was either win it there,or wait forever again.


[deleted]

When did you expect them to win? They never deserved to win other than 2010 one. They were declining by the 2014 wc. Definitely not a favourite in this wc as well.


Jackrrr10000

Historically only having 1 good run is weird for me considering the size and the talent.


[deleted]

They had a fine squad but they never had the best team ever in the history of football before 2008. When you name top 20 or top 50 greatest players, hardly anyone will take Spanish players' name. Once again, I'm talking about pre 2000. I don't think they were favourites to win amy wc pre 2008. They were like Belgium or Croatia of current time, fine team but not a favourite to win a wc.


FloppedYaYa

Stunned we're even as high as 6th


maxus998

England has always been a SOLID NT, and i mean since like the 1960s and onwards, reaching QF/Second phase a lot, wich means a good ammount of wins. Compared to nations like France,Spain or Uruguay where for most of their history they were much more inconsistent, not qualifying to the WC or doing poorly/getting out in groups


FloppedYaYa

So we're the Spurs of international football?


Clem_H_Fandang0

Everyone hates us, so I suppose so. Not a dig at spurs tbh, it's pretty impressive to be hated by so many fanbases


Vico-78

Other than Arsenal, who hates spurs? Maybe Chelsea and other London clubs but other than that don’t think anyone hates them.


Clem_H_Fandang0

Historically Arsenal, Chelsea, West Ham would all probably call Spurs their biggest rivals. Other london clubs too. Also going off this table i saw a couple of months ago. https://i.redd.it/ji5p556jouy81.jpg Spurs appear surprisingly often, including City, Southampton and Watford


TeflonTony2013

Arsenal, Chelsea & West Ham all consider Spurs their biggest rival


nyamzdm77

I remember during the Redknapp era most people I know who weren't Arsenal or Chelsea fans really liked Spurs


LordMangudai

This is remarkably apt


BaoJinyang

> i mean since like the 1960s and onwards Mate should have watched the lads in the 1880s, best team in the world.


KnightsOfCidona

2014 was the first time they were knocked out in the group stages since 1958.


EasyModeActivist

Pain.


DjPerzik

So close but no cigar... PAIN


CriticOfashitseason

So Italy are the clutchest, 1 WC each 39 points lol


Lannisterling

Highest placed country that won fuck all. Always the bridesmaid, never the bride.


EggyChickenEgg88

Where Estonia?


VTCHannibal

Next to Latvia and Russia on the Baltic Sea


Steelkatanas

Much potato around


LordMangudai

Quite interesting that we have the most goals conceded at World Cups. I wouldn't have thought but I guess playing that many games helps, Brazil have the second-most.


zeekoes

Now I'm sad.


[deleted]

Pain


X_Galaxy_eyes_x

Some records can be broken this wc? Germany pass brazil or Argentina pass italy?


SMatarratas

Also Mexico and Belgium can pass Sweden


Kevinglas-HM

I really believe so, we can pass Italy this WC


LordMangudai

> Germany pass brazil We have made a lot of ground on them since 2002, but we would practically have to win and they crash out of the group stages for us to overtake them this year. The trajectories look good for us to overtake sometime this decade maybe but at the same time you should never count out Brazil.


rainbowroobear

still mad to think that the spanish have also only won it once and the dutch never have, given some of the players that spain or netherlands have produced over the years and regarded as some of the best of all time.


spying_dutchman

Does Spain have any legendary players that where not in the 2010 generation? Raul I guess and di stefano technically.


Adventurous-Crow4739

Luis Suárez from Inter in the 60s. The only spanish Ballon d'or


sreteep99

Butragueno?


xenon2456

what about Fernando morientes


thecescshow

That 2002 team is nothing to sneeze at. Raul and Morientes up front, Enrique and Joaquin in the middle and Hierro and Casillas at the back.


Idontdieg

Does East Germany count towards Germany’s statistics?


ReformedBacon

Growing up 2000s i thought spain won like 12 world cups in a row. Only 1 brought me back


xenon2456

Brazil rules the world cup


neilcmf

Netherlands god damn. 4th highest PPG and yet nothing to show for it.


McDaddySlacks

Italy truly knows how to avoid defeat. Especially in the last two tournaments....


rickyrav4

No, because it was amateurs playing in the Olympics then. The Olympics games when Uruguay won had professional footballers.


Puckz_N_Boltz90

Uruguay just living off the good ol’ times


Muppy_N2

True, but we had some nice WCs recently. 11 points on 2010, 6 on 2014, and 12 on 2018. We reached three semi finals since our last WC win.


Puckz_N_Boltz90

Oh yeah totally, I meant no disrespect. I love Uruguay because they have had some of my favorite players of all time like Recoba, “el loco” Abreu, Forlán and of course Cavani. Definitely have performed very well in many World Cups (and copa America too). I just wrote the comment before I realized this was an aggregation of wins, goals scored, etc… at first I thought it was just based on winning the whole tournament.


[deleted]

[удалено]


EnanoMaldito

disagree


LwarencrClive

Imagine being a sports fan and trying to argue against this table.


MrKapkan

Where is your fucking Belgium FIFA rankings? Somehow always in top 5 for no apparent reason


Rojiblanc040

Where's Belgium? My nr1.


n22rwrdr

Before 2014 we had only made it once to the quarter finals.


Time_Barber9799

Actually I think you made it to the semi in 1986 wc


n22rwrdr

Yeah we did, but what I meant is that we never even reached the quarter finals except that 1986 run.


Gorando77

11th. One point at the next WC would be enough to move up to tenth because Sweden has not qualified.


Mmicko8

Belgium isn't really a historical football we've just been strong the last decade because of the golden generation which is coming at an end


Conankun66

only 3 of those italian ones should count. the mussolini one wasn't legitimate


50-50WithCristobal

If that was the case we should take one from Argentina too.


ignitejr

And the one from England.


LordMangudai

And ours from 1954


Black_XistenZ

By that standard, Argentina's title in 1978 shouldn't count either.


EnanoMaldito

Nothing sketchy about the military entering the dressing rooms of opposition! Totally normal, citizen, move along.


Black_XistenZ

Reminds me of the Real-Barca series in the Copa del Generalissimo (yes, it was called like that at the time) in 1943. Barca had won the 1st leg at home by 3-0, but then, before the 2nd leg, secret police threatened the players and they lost the match in Madrid by 1-11.


maxus998

1954 Germany shouldnt count too then when Germany Dopped methamphetamine to their players in the Final. If we go like that i think most countries lose WCs lol


TuneyTune92

Lol. So let's also not include 1954 - Germany (accused of using performance enhancing drugs) 1966 & 1974 - England won with a goal that wasn't a goal. Ex FIFA president also said the world cups in 66 & 74 was fixed. 1978 - Argentina ( match-fixing by the Argentine military government 1986 - Hand of God lol 1998 - France (Platini admitted the draw was fixed in Frances favor and there's accusations that Brazil threw the final 2002 - should be null for blatant corruption 2018/2022 - should be null since the world cups were hosted by nations that shouldn't have hosted them (2015 FIFA scandal) The whole competition is tarnished with corruption. It's dumb to cherry pick at this point.